As a reader that appreciates your opinion very much, I have to express some enormous disappointment in your single reviews as of late. Your last five reviews have clocked in at an average of 25.2 words. I would attribute this to four of them being “retro” reviews, but the current single (“Come Over”) is the shortest review of all.

I’m not saying this as someone who disagrees with you often (I don’t) nor as someone who thinks “Come Over” is one of the best singles of Chesney’s career (I do). I just think someone who loves the genre as much as you shouldn’t use what you perceive as songwriting laziness as an excuse for review-writing laziness.

If you don’t want to review new songs, I’ll gladly do it for you. Live up to your considerable taste and expertise!

I have to agree with Zac on this one. One of the original reasons why I came to your site a few years ago was because of your insightful reviews of current country songs, but the last year it feels like that has tailed off. Maybe your attitude of the genre has changed and that’s understandable, but if you guys aren’t going to have the care on your reviews like you used to (Except for the retro stuff which has really increased), let me know and I’ll find another site.

I appreciate your reviews a lot, and think the writers and contributors on this site do a great job being fair, but that opinion is starting to change a little bit. I’m not saying this to be rude or demeaning of the site in any way, but it’s more along the lines of “my favorite country site” is no longer producing the content that I came to the site for, why am I coming back”.

I already mentioned it on Ben’s review, but an equation or a single word doesn’t equal a review. The reason it worked once is that it was a novelty. After all of the feedback to Ben’s review, it seems like an insult to injury to come back with a review even shorter. I’ve been a big fan of the blog for a few years, so I say this out of respect, but if you all don’t have the time to kick out full reviews, leave these mediocre tracks alone.

Short and snarky like this works in small doses (This one by Dan was hilarious: http://bit.ly/epyQc), but I have to agree that this site has gone to that well a couple times to many lately. By all means, be snarky, but at least give a bit of an explanation of why you think this is reductive.

As far as I’m concerned, it’s Kevin’s review, and he can write it the way he wants. Beyond that, all I can say is that short reviews have been around a long time on Country Universe, and I doubt they’re going anywhere any time soon. The slightly confrontational tone in certain comments is a tad disconcerting though, I might say.

Since this perception is out there (and I understand why – we’re a chummy group), I just want to pipe up that from my own perspective – and regardless of my opinion about this particular song or review – the sort of feedback that has been expressed above is entirely appropriate. And I don’t say that to, like, undermine Ben’s comment (which is valid), or to backdoor-criticize Kevin’s work; I just want to make the point that it’s awesome whenever returning readers take the time to give honest, respectful feedback on posts – and I personally feel like that’s been the case here, though of course tone can be interpreted lots of ways.

I didn’t mean to be confrontational, but I think my point is this site has a good reputation and I don’t want to see it tarnished. Whenever I hear a new song on the radio (Or an old song that I enjoy but wanted to get others’ reactions on it) I always type in the name of the song, followed by “Country Universe” because this site I’ve found gives the most fair reviews. That’s not confrontational, that’s high praise.

I’ve not heard the new Chesney song yet, but if I had and kind of enjoyed it, to come here and see this review I would ask what’s up. Yeah Kevin can write however he wants, but for the most part, the standards of his site are pretty damned high and that’s why I keep coming back. Again, to see a review like this would make me ask, what’s up.

Anyone who disagrees with a reviewer on this site gets pilloried by the whole reviewer family. It makes me wonder why the five or six of you don’t just meet at each others’ houses and talk amongst yourselves.

Personally, I like the one word review. To the point and you don’t have to read on and on while someone disects line by line or lyric by lyric. This song is nothing special at all, IMO. The only song of KC’s that I liked from HW and WTTFB is Somewhere With You. All the rest seems remixed and nothing new or different. That’s just my opinion. Couldn’t think of one word to say all this.

I would like this site a lot better if the reviewers didn’t comment on their own reviews. It’s so much more professional that way, and you guys get very defensive at times if someone disagrees with you.

Why wouldn’t a reviewer have a conversation with the people reading their website. That’s kind of the point of a blog. And of course someone is going to get defensive when you say that the problem with their website is this or that. In this case I think it’s some of the readers who are gaining up on the reviewers for what I think is a very invalid argument. What makes a good review is not the length but the content. That’s the trouble with the truth.

…, well, folks, creative freedom seems to be clashing with the valid desire for having more of something that’s been obviously considered worth having of as much as possible of.

sounds like you’ve fallen into the “michelangelo sky trap”, staff-aliens from country universe! we can’t settle for just one stroke, when knowing that your able to do rather big domesort of ceilings in a rather colorful way.

i enjoy your “reductive” stuff as much as the more extensive one, but i guess the more unhappy folks have a point here: review commonly implies more than just a glimpse. then again, michelangelo would have struggled too, painting a sky from so little inspiration as this new chesney song provides.

We comment on our own reviews because we feel it’s important to engage readers by participating in discussion along with them, and responding to comments both positive and negative (though this is Kevin’s review, and so far he’s only commented on it once).

I’m surprised that the length of the review, which is something I would consider somewhat trivial, has diverted so much attention from discussion pertaining to the song itself.

then again, michelangelo would have struggled too, painting a sky from so little inspiration as this new chesney song provides.

It can at times be difficult to write at length about songs as uninspiring as the new releases have been as of late, which I definitely found to be the case with my preceding Chris Cagle review.

…, wow! now that i’ve played the tune for the fourth time it has started growing on me…guess it’ll do what quite a few mediocre songs have done lately – rising to the top of the charts soon.

i suppose, at the end of the day i just go along with that great dixie philosopher, brantley gilbert: “country must be country wide”…and proper reviews better be longer. so much also for those, who have ever been inclined to believe that size doesn’t matter.

I’m sure we’ll get a lengthy and glowing review of “blown away” to offset this one-word review of Kenny, and I’m sure that review will please more people than this one pisses off. Kenny fans online-not so prominent; whereas Carrie fans online are like an armie of zombies, you won’t stop them if you dis one of her songs, alternately they will love you forever if you praise her (or at least until the next negative review)